Encroachments during RS survey and lines of occupation

[CBarrett]

I have seen a surveyor in this predicament recently, and I am not entirely sure how I would handle this if I was surveyor of record.

Let's say I surveyed a deed parcel, in a very rural area (300'by 600' parcel) and there are no serious concerns about boundary establishment procedure, everything fits within tenths and is easily explained.

During the process of the survey I discover that there is a neighbor building sitting across the PL, along with some paved driveways. My client (parcel owner already knows this, this is why I was hired to determine the boundary). I file an RS of the boundary, but do not show physical improvements (building and other potential encroachments), or show just some but not all surveyed.

What are my obligations with respect to that record of survey?
At a recent seminar I was listening in on a talk about a similar situation, but with respect to your obligation to client confidentiality - and from that point of view, recommendation is to not disclose this 'to the world' via an RS. (In this seminar example, surveyor was retained to do an ALTA.)

To come to sort of a full circle, in Orange County surveyors are lately being asked to put a not on the RS saying that "There are no conflicts with existing visible improvements and the exterior boundary line." Last project I worked on was a post ALTA RS, I had a conversation with the county surveyor office and told them, look, we did an ALTA, you are welcome to see it if that would alleviate your concerns, but we are not comfortable taking on the liability of putting that note on the RS. It is not required, it is not tested in court, and big company can equal big lawsuit target.
County surveyors was nice and said something to the effect of, we are finding more and more RS's where people don't take lines of occupation into consideration when doing the RS, when they should.

I have a sneaky suspicion these are symptoms of issues which are being discussed at a level I don't have access to. Insights? Opinions?

[Derek_9672]

To me, the documentation of the encroachment on the record of survey is how you put constructive notice into the public record that there are possible unwritten rights. It tells not only your client, but future purchasers of the property and the neighbor that there is an issue present, and may be the most important service you can provide to your client if they hire you to perform a boundary survey.

I would also argue that an encroachment is material evidence affecting the location of the boundary line 8762(b)(1), as well as important evidence regarding the relationship of the subject property to an adjacent tracts 8764(d).

I'm not sure I understand the circumstances in which confidentiality is an issue.

[Ric7308]

Very good topic to discuss. The Board is aware of the concerns voiced by OC County Surveyor's Office on this topic because to their credit, they contacted us about this multiple times over the last few years. I'm not going to go into a great deal of depth on the importance of recognizing field conditions which may/may not be the reason for why the surveyor was hired in the first place and reporting those in an appropriate manner since many of you already do recognize this. I will acknowledge that in some of the inquiries from the CS, it was apparent why they had some concerns.

Many times this topic is brought up in relation to 8762(b)(3) aka alternate positions and whether an RS needs to be filed pursuant to that language due to encroachments like you mentioned. In reality, the surveyor in responsible charge is the person responsible for determining if an RS needs to be filed depicting possible evidence of "...materially alternate position of lines or points..." since that surveyor presumably has access to all the information necessary to make a proper determination. If that is the case, then it is incumbent upon the land surveyor to document that evidence.

This being said, encroachments by themselves are not always the best indication of an alternate position of lines or points. Certainly an indication that someone either doesn't know where the property line(s) is or has disregarded the location, if known. For example, I usually ask the land surveyor "If you are characterizing the feature(s) as an "encroachment", then you can only do that by being relatively certain of the location of the property line(s). How can there be an alternate position if you've already taken into account all the evidence to make that determination?" As some in the profession and on this forum have stated in other discussions, simply marking the location of the property line(s) "where it matches record" is not sufficiently determining the location of the property line(s) in most cases. Its not a math exercise.

Documenting the encroaching evidence is a responsibility to the property owners. This doesn't mean that it is required to be documented on an RS or even by itself triggers the requirement to file an RS. Any land surveyor obviously has the discretion to file an RS for any reason but that's a different story. The land surveyor needs to consider all available evidence. You can certainly document the information on a separate map provided to your client or the property owners. From a civil law point of view, you need to consider the implications of not revealing information to your client and/or the adjacent property owners. The PLS Act is clear as to a reason for the RS filing is so all vested parties could have reasonable public access when it comes to the location of property line(s). But other features such as you mentioned is more of a civil, contractual, professional, (and some would say, ethical) matter. Consult with your attorney or client's attorney.

The CS cannot require that statement on an RS and the submitting land surveyor is not required to include that statement on the submitted/filed RS. However, there is nothing wrong with having a discussion between professionals and making sure nothing was missed. We are all humans and we all can miss things at times.

Hope this helps

[CBarrett]

To me, the documentation of the encroachment on the record of survey is how you put constructive notice into the public record that there are possible unwritten rights. It tells not only your client, but future purchasers of the property and the neighbor that there is an issue present, and may be the most important service you can provide to your client if they hire you to perform a boundary survey.

I would also argue that an encroachment is material evidence affecting the location of the boundary line 8762(b)(1), as well as important evidence regarding the relationship of the subject property to an adjacent tracts 8764(d).

I'm not sure I understand the circumstances in which confidentiality is an issue.

I am not sure what to think regarding confidentiality. Confidentiality was discussed during the 7 states conference this last year, in a presentation given by Knud Hermansen. It was in a context of an ALTA, but it may have been in context of a boundary survey. Since it covered a number of states as general advice, and not one particular state. I am not sure how that would mesh with our set of requirements for filing a record of survey. I am going from memory here on a number of details - Which is why I am bringing them up here, for discussion, so I can hear from peers and experts on how they did or would handle this in practice. Knut definitely presented a convincing argument from one perspective (I think he is an attorney as well, back east).

I remember during the conference, this concept of client confidentiality with regards to encroachments caused a stir.
Incidentally, recently I have expanded my area of practice somewhat (geographically), to an areas that is not as um 'neat and organized and documented' as Orange County (if you can call it that), and it looks like it will not be too long before I have a similar case on my hands.

[mpallamary]

For what it is worth, a Record of Survey does not impart constructive notice, as a matter of law.

https://www.xyht.com/education/filed-vs ... documents/

[hellsangle]

Yeah, it may not impart "constructive notice" . . . but it documents a condition on a certain date.

The potential client is told before he pulls the trigger to engage our services . . . if encroachments are found they will be shown a the Record of Survey map. Furthermore, the Potential Client, is made aware that it may negatively affect future sale, financing, etc.

I'm with balfourvanvleck . . . the clock is ticking.

Comment: if encroachment(s) exist - don't use the word "encroaches xx.x'" . . . rather "over xx.x'" or "clear xx.x'" of boundary line.

If you have entered into a confidentiality agreement - you're between an ethical rock and hard place. Hide an encroachment?! If you were an appraiser, would you defraud a bank by claiming properties are worth more than they are . . . at the same time defraud the insurance claiming they are worth less?!

Knud's presentation was a TEN! He presents in a humorous way on such serious subjects.

Crazy Phil - Surveyor to Recorder

[CBarrett]

Very good topic to discuss. The Board is aware of the concerns voiced by OC County Surveyor's Office on this topic because to their credit, they contacted us about this multiple times over the last few years. I'm not going to go into a great deal of depth on the importance of recognizing field conditions which may/may not be the reason for why the surveyor was hired in the first place and reporting those in an appropriate manner since many of you already do recognize this. I will acknowledge that in some of the inquiries from the CS, it was apparent why they had some concerns.

Many times this topic is brought up in relation to 8762(b)(3) aka alternate positions and whether an RS needs to be filed pursuant to that language due to encroachments like you mentioned. In reality, the surveyor in responsible charge is the person responsible for determining if an RS needs to be filed depicting possible evidence of "...materially alternate position of lines or points..." since that surveyor presumably has access to all the information necessary to make a proper determination. If that is the case, then it is incumbent upon the land surveyor to document that evidence.

This being said, encroachments by themselves are not always the best indication of an alternate position of lines or points. Certainly an indication that someone either doesn't know where the property line(s) is or has disregarded the location, if known. For example, I usually ask the land surveyor "If you are characterizing the feature(s) as an "encroachment", then you can only do that by being relatively certain of the location of the property line(s). How can there be an alternate position if you've already taken into account all the evidence to make that determination?" As some in the profession and on this forum have stated in other discussions, simply marking the location of the property line(s) "where it matches record" is not sufficiently determining the location of the property line(s) in most cases. Its not a math exercise.

I had a conversation with Tony Cuomo month or so ago (I worked him for a few years), I was a little bit flabbergasted about how many people create pincushions and don't post process their GPS (among other things), after I discovered a large group of surveyors on facebook. Tony in his always nice lighthearted way pointed out that having worked in Orange County (and in California) most of my career, I am a bit spoiled and privileged.... as in, the education and somewhat cushy circumstances under which we operate here are, how do I say this without upsetting people, of a much higher standard than national average.

Documenting the encroaching evidence is a responsibility to the property owners. This doesn't mean that it is required to be documented on an RS or even by itself triggers the requirement to file an RS. Any land surveyor obviously has the discretion to file an RS for any reason but that's a different story. The land surveyor needs to consider all available evidence. You can certainly document the information on a separate map provided to your client or the property owners. From a civil law point of view, you need to consider the implications of not revealing information to your client and/or the adjacent property owners. The PLS Act is clear as to a reason for the RS filing is so all vested parties could have reasonable public access when it comes to the location of property line(s). But other features such as you mentioned is more of a civil, contractual, professional, (and some would say, ethical) matter. Consult with your attorney or client's attorney.

The CS cannot require that statement on an RS and the submitting land surveyor is not required to include that statement on the submitted/filed RS. However, there is nothing wrong with having a discussion between professionals and making sure nothing was missed. We are all humans and we all can miss things at times.

Hope this helps

Thanks for those details Rick! I am glad OC is asking about this.
Luckily, I work at a company which welcomes and pushes for high standards of practice. Also we work on a lot of large development projects which include multiple surveys from due diligence phase all the way to post construction ALTA's etc... So I always have ample evidence of what we already looked at, including a variety of record and field encumbrances. I can see how this could be a much bigger problem on single lot single homeowner surveys which are on a very limited time and budgets.

On the other hand, in big companies you also have a number of 'risk management advisors' where regardless of how in depth your work is, you want to limit your liability exposure as well by 'certifying as little as possible'. I think this is why it often bothers me when some people immediately jump on conclusions that not showing all your cards immediately means something nefarious is going on. Risk management usually tells you the more you show, the more you can be questioned, which in turn gives the world more data to review, and possibly misconstrue. This can lead to accusations, and even when you are cleared of wrongdoing, the process is expensive, and likely to drive your insurance costs up, which then in turn leads to unhappy investors. Part of corporate officers’ job, in additional to professional responsibilities is corporate risk exposure management and cost of doing business. Anyhow, life in a big city....

I my case, we're also a part of county's on-call checking team, so I have good access and relationship with much of the county surveyor staff and my reservation about placing the note on the map was an overall very friendly and open-minded conversation (Ok, ok, I was trying to find more professional sounding words for "I love them to pieces"). I welcomed the discussion about my boundary determination process and ALTA findings etc... that in turn alleviated their concerns. I've seen others have a much harsher reaction to the note.

On a side note, even though I used term encroachments in the title, I don't use that term on my ALTA's, or anywhere else. Funny force of habit how it slipped in.

[CBarrett]

Oh, I remembered more of what Knud has talked about. Let's say you survey the property and your client was encroaching on the neighbor property by 15 feet. Neighbor was unaware of the exact PL location and allowing it. You discover it and in the process, you either inform the neighbor or place your data in public record where the neighbor becomes informed. Turns out that now that he know of the situation, the neighbor puts a stop to the encroachment.

Your client sues you because your action because your breach of client confidentiality happened some months before the statutory limit is passed, which would have turned this encroachment into a legitimate prescriptive easement. Now your client has to demo the driveway and rebuild it elsewhere, and is suing you for the cost.

I don't know california laws well enough to know if this can actually happen.

[CBarrett]

Comment: if encroachment(s) exist - don't use the word "encroaches xx.x'" . . . rather "over xx.x'" or "clear xx.x'" of boundary line.

Oh I don't use it on maps. I am amused with myself about how the darn word slipped itself into the conversation. I've done that (and subsequent backpaddling) a thousand times.

I usually identify a feature and where it sits relative to the PL, let's say SW'LY END/PP ARM IS 1.6' NE'LY/PL.
Then someone else can take on the liability of who owns what fixture and where it is meant to sit, and whether it is an appurtenance or a burden.

[DWoolley]

...in Orange County surveyors are lately being asked to put a not on the RS saying that "There are no conflicts with existing visible improvements and the exterior boundary line."

This note has been in effect since January 2012. There was plenty of written material from that time as to why the note is in practice. This note was initiated by the OC CLSA JPPC.

Again, read the "Guide to the Preparation of Records of Survey and Corner Records".

Also, think about the minimum standard - precisely what constitutes a minimum standard - by ALTA/NSPS that applies to all 50 states. These minimum standards are determined by NSPS and ALTA, the title companies and their attorneys. Riddle yourself this, am I below a published standard that applies to 50 states? Am I defendable in a court? Can I explain why I didn't survey to a nationally adopted minimum boundary standard? Trust me, that is precisely how the questions will be presented.

Take a moment and think about the weight of a collective's consensus if you're looking to meet or exceed the standard of care or simply trying to cruise just off the bottom.

Lastly, is the professional seeking advise from folks that have filed many maps and/or checked maps, following a written standards or simply, seeking affirmation/confirmation bias by someone/anyone offering a perspective based on ...(what?)? Rhetorical question we should each ask occasionally.

The record of survey the land surveyor's medium for documenting a survey and the law is a minimum standard requirements. We spend an inordinate amount of time and words trying to lower the minimum standards.

DWoolley

[Edward M Reading]

...
The CS cannot require that statement on an RS and the submitting land surveyor is not required to include that statement on the submitted/filed RS. ...

End of story.

[Jim Frame]

A few years back a surveyor with a well-respected firm in a nearby city surveyed a deed parcel in a 120-year-old city block and filed a ROS. He did a great job establishing the block lines, which fit record within a tenth or two, but ignored some 100-plus-year-old occupation evidence and a boatload of conflicting deed and map evidence. His client sued the neighbor (my client) to remove the "encroaching" fence, driveway and garage, which the surveyor neglected to show on his ROS. The trial judge agreed with my findings and ruled against the plaintiff. The plaintiff appealed, but in mediation my client agreed to settle, having already spent $120k on the matter and facing another $30k or so to defend the appeal. (He didn't give up any land, just some cash. His appellate attorney was 90% sure he could win the appeal, but the bottom line won out.)

What's not yet clear is whether or not any of this is going to blow back on the other surveyor. He's no longer with the firm that filed the ROS; not sure if his departure was related to the lawsuit. But he clearly screwed up by not showing the conflicts on his map and alerting his client to the potential for a different boundary line location. I wouldn't want to be in his shoes right now.

[CBarrett]

...
The CS cannot require that statement on an RS and the submitting land surveyor is not required to include that statement on the submitted/filed RS. ...

End of story.

Exactly. It also doesn't imply that someone is engaging in substandard practice.

Where I work (Michael Baker International) is a huge company, we have to sign NDA's. Anything that's is not legally required, like you said, end of story.

If someone starts to cast aspersions or speculate about that being indicative of substandard work, they need to stop as they may be getting perilously close to slander, and may need to get a court order to examine the work.

[CBarrett]

...in Orange County surveyors are lately being asked to put a not on the RS saying that "There are no conflicts with existing visible improvements and the exterior boundary line."

This note has been in effect since January 2012. There was plenty of written material from that time as to why the note is in practice. This note was initiated by the OC CLSA JPPC.

Again, read the "Guide to the Preparation of Records of Survey and Corner Records".

Also, think about the minimum standard - precisely what constitutes a minimum standard - by ALTA/NSPS that applies to all 50 states. These minimum standards are determined by NSPS and ALTA, the title companies and their attorneys. Riddle yourself this, am I below a published standard that applies to 50 states? Am I defendable in a court? Can I explain why I didn't survey to a nationally adopted minimum boundary standard? Trust me, that is precisely how the questions will be presented.

Take a moment and think about the weight of a collective's consensus if you're looking to meet or exceed the standard of care or simply trying to cruise just off the bottom.

Lastly, is the professional seeking advise from folks that have filed many maps and/or checked maps, following a written standards or simply, seeking affirmation/confirmation bias by someone/anyone offering a perspective based on ...(what?)? Rhetorical question we should each ask occasionally.

The record of survey the land surveyor's medium for documenting a survey and the law is a minimum standard requirements. We spend an inordinate amount of time and words trying to lower the minimum standards.

DWoolley

You are preaching to the choir here.

Still, my question is, what are specific concerns this note is supposed to address?

[DWoolley]

You are preaching to the choir here.

Still, my question is, what are specific concerns this note is supposed to address?

The note was intended to lessen the mapping burden on the submitting surveyor. Rather than require the surveyor to map the adjacent improvements she could choose to add the note.

Boundary lines are invisible, end points are often not intervisible, the public often does not understand tenths of a foot, angles or bearings - without the relationship to improvements the map is worthless. Generally, the public wants to know the relationship of the physical improvements to the boundary line i.e. distance from the driveway or garage or fence to the boundary line. The surveyor's work product should accommodate the public. After paying thousands of dollars for a map it is not unreasonable for an owner to be able to reestablish the line with a pocket tape.

DWoolley

[DWoolley]

The best defense against a claim of negligence is to apply a written standard, ideally stated in the contract, and then, follow the standard. I have witnessed many a surveyor walked to the legal gallows resulting in millions of dollars of liabilities for not understanding the use of standards is for their own protection.

Where does a surveyor find standards to apply? As mentioned above, ALTA/NSPS minimum standards. When entering into contract that has red flags i.e. prelitigation, the surveyor does not need to be performing an ALTA to grab portions of the standards. Again, restate the standard and then, follow the standard and it is difficult for the surveyor to be sued for negligence.

Surveyors often reference "Brown" in their professional reports, depositions, etc. Experience tells me few people have actually read the text.

The commonly referenced textbook is “Brown’s Boundary Control and Legal Principles” (5th ed. 2003) by Curtis M. Brown, Walter G. Robillard & Donald A. Wilson. The following was taken from that textbook:

Chapter 14 – Role of the Surveyor

Principal 1. Every parcel of land whose boundaries are surveyed and monumented by a surveyor should conform with the official record. Relationships of possession and use lines to deed lines should be depicted on a plat or in a report furnished to the client.
...
Principal 5. A land surveyor locates boundary lines according to the description in the deed and then relates lines of possession that do not agree with these lines and reports the facts to the client, preferably in writing.
...
Principal 7. Because original lines surveyed and marked by the creating surveyor control over all other elements in a deed, the surveyor must determine whether the line of possession recovered is the best remaining evidence of the original line marked.
...
Principal 10. The final product of a land survey should be a plat delivered to the client in conformance with the minimum technical standards of the state as well as a professional opinion as to the identification of the boundaries of the parcel of land. At a minimum each plat should show all monuments found or set; the basis of bearings; bearings and lengths of all lines, boundaries, and measurements to objects; all visible encroachments; and easements according to agreed requirements. [Emphasis mine].

Pretty tough to explain why the textbook the surveyor used as a reference was not followed. Hot tip, the first one is free, when a second treatise is entered into the record by reference the entire book is now in play.

Bottom bouncers are best used to catch walleye, not making maps.

DWoolley

[CBarrett]

Thankfully I'm not a bottom feeder who does random parcel surveys at undercutter prices, and has to skip steps, hop around, trim corners and hope they dont get caught.

If any of our projects undergo judicial review, we have legal counsel in house, and plenty of resources to present our own expert witnesses.

I am familiar with the text you posted, you give this to people in your LS review classes, and clark on boundaries has a very similar, but more expanded chapter on the matter.

[CBarrett]

Principal 10. The final product of a land survey should be a plat delivered to the client in conformance with the minimum technical standards of the state as well as a professional opinion as to the identification of the boundaries of the parcel of land. At a minimum each plat should show all monuments found or set; the basis of bearings; bearings and lengths of all lines, boundaries, and measurements to objects; all visible encroachments; and easements according to agreed requirements. [Emphasis mine].

PLS Act, 8764 (c) The record of survey need not consist of a survey of an entire property.

One is a peach the other one is an apple. Similar but not the same.

[mpallamary]

Perhaps it is time we updated the CLSA contract form.

[mpallamary]

Current form

[CBarrett]

Bottom bouncers are best used to catch walleye, not making maps.

DWoolley

This is not the type of remarks becomings a member of JPPC committee and a legislator who professes to espouse and promote professional excellence.

Who are you addressing with this anyway?
Do you *really* think that a company of MBI's size doesn't have legal counsel in house qualified to defend registered professionals and we are all just one glimpse away from being stripped of a license????

I haven't tried to look at how many professionals we employ, I am willing to bet the number is in thousands. Unlike CLSA meetings, our internal culture is not that of booze for raffle prizes and gambling a for christmas party. I think you need to spend a little bit of time working with related disciplines, at the minimum civil engineers, mechanical and structural engineers and architects to learn what higher level professionalism looks like.
Inane ego trips and backward attitudes that are rife in surveying profession are usually exponentially less acceptable among related professional circles. One only needs to spend three minutes interacting with others to see the difference.

I don't concern myself with bottom bouncers or whomever it is that you like to police, our performance demands are at the opposite end of the spectrum. You should set your sights little higher as well.

[DWoolley]

Bottom bouncers are best used to catch walleye, not making maps.
DWoolley

...
Who are you addressing with this anyway?
...
I don't concern myself with bottom bouncers or whomever it is that you like to police, our performance demands are at the opposite end of the spectrum. You should set your sights little higher as well.

CBarrett:

Please note my 2/4 post at 6:46am quotes you and is directed to your question and then, in a separate back-to-back post, at 7:07am, I write about Brown, negligence and bottom bouncers (everyone here knows they exist). The reason those two posts are separated is so as not to be addressed to you specifically. This is a pattern in my writing – please take a moment and look back. I try to address my comments to specific commentors when that is my intent or in the alternative, I write in more general terms so as not to personalize the posts. I cannot read it for you (see what I did there? Wait, are you flirting with me?). I write that to you in good fun and with a smile, no reason to set the record straight or to put me in my place. Fun aside, I sincerely apologize if I offended your sensibilities.

You have known me since the summer of 1989. I have had ample time and opportunity to call you a bottom bouncer if I thought it was applicable and I were so inclined.

Although I am not familiar with your particular in-house counsel, in my experience they are usually not litigators, and the litigation is handled by outside counsel.

DWoolley

[David Kendall]

I think you need to spend a little bit of time working with related disciplines, at the minimum civil engineers, mechanical and structural engineers and architects to learn what higher level professionalism looks like.

Very funny! Don't forget about the planners and attorneys....

[CBarrett]

Bottom bouncers are best used to catch walleye, not making maps.
DWoolley

...
Who are you addressing with this anyway?
...
I don't concern myself with bottom bouncers or whomever it is that you like to police, our performance demands are at the opposite end of the spectrum. You should set your sights little higher as well.

CBarrett:

Please note my 2/4 post at 6:46am quotes you and is directed to your question and then, in a separate back-to-back post, at 7:07am, I write about Brown, negligence and bottom bouncers (everyone here knows they exist). The reason those two posts are separated is so as not to be addressed to you specifically. This is a pattern in my writing – please take a moment and look back. I try to address my comments to specific commentors when that is my intent or in the alternative, I write in more general terms so as not to personalize the posts. I cannot read it for you (see what I did there? Wait, are you flirting with me?). I write that to you in good fun and with a smile, no reason to set the record straight or to put me in my place. Fun aside, I sincerely apologize if I offended your sensibilities.

You have known me since the summer of 1989. I have had ample time and opportunity to call you a bottom bouncer if I thought it was applicable and I were so inclined.

Although I am not familiar with your particular in-house counsel, in my experience they are usually not litigators, and the litigation is handled by outside counsel.

DWoolley

Dave,
Thank You for clarifying, I appreciate that you took an effort to clarify your intent. It is hard to judge intent and of the message through the medium which does not involve nonverbal cues.
Likewise, I m sorry for being harsh and misreading your intent.
I started thinking OMG Dave, do I need to smack you around (virtually), you used to be so nice, we used to be school pals, You, David Bush and me! Fun times.

Flirting with you? Huh? Gaaah, noooo, nothing personal I don't date people in the business, never have, too problematic to get it all mixed up.
I'm old, fat and happily married. Hubby on the other hand, complains about my attempts to turn him into a surveyor, but resistance is futile.

I don't know our in house counsel that well either, I never needed their assistance, or came close to it. I'm sure they can summon whatever legal genies the company needs, when they're needed. Just like any big corporate outfit.

[CBarrett]

I think you need to spend a little bit of time working with related disciplines, at the minimum civil engineers, mechanical and structural engineers and architects to learn what higher level professionalism looks like.

Very funny! Don't forget about the planners and attorneys....

Tell me about it!!!
I was raised by an architect (mom), a doctor (aunt), two mechanical engineers (one naval one aerospace - dad and uncle), a county surveyor (maternal grandfather) and a lawyer (paternal grandfather). Grandmothers were both working teachers.

We didn't play pictionary and saing carols over christmas dinners. It looked more like the Big Bang Theory gathering.
Grandmothers were 'ladies' who were married to businessmen, who didn't raise children, mom and aunt amd dad and uncle were all busy building careers.
Grandpa's, the lawyer and the county surveyor were my primary caretakers before elementary school, because someone had to do it and they were, well, practical problem solvers. Then I was sent to elementary school a year early because I passed all the testing, and in kindergarten I didn't know how to relate to other kids - so I got kicked out of the kindergarden. Yay, lol. Maybe not exactly kicked out, they 'recommended I might to better in a more organized and supervised environment, like school'... yeah, kicked out. (this was in the old country)
Hindsight, it's a little bit comical.

Then at 18, I told all of them to go fly a kite, I am not staying in this stupid communist country, I am moving to the US, like my aunt and uncle, and making my own way over there. They disowned me because I didn't stay over there and go to university to study applied mathematics. "What, you will just stay a dumb surveyor???" 'but grandpa'... "but grandpa was a county surveyor and then had his own company employing almost 100 people, then the revolution happened, so he went back to county..." Ok, well then, so I can do it too in America, thankyouverymuch. [insert eastern european accents here].